Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 298 references

Solid-state quantum emitters are now on a credible path to scalable many-body entangled photonic states, argues this review.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 20:07 UTC pith:PP5A2SPD

load-bearing objection A broad, honestly caveated review with no new results; the main flaw is that the g(2) anti-dip caveat is stated in one section and ignored in another. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2511.20797 v1 pith:PP5A2SPD submitted 2025-11-25 quant-ph

Many-Body Entanglement in Solid-State Emitters

Emma Daggett , Christian M. Lange , Bennet Windt , Arshag Danageozian , Alexander Senichev , Jordi Arnau Monta\~n\`a-L\'opez , Chanchal , Kinjol Barua
show 18 more authors
Xingyu Gao Zhaoyun Zheng Vijin Kizhake Veetil Souvik Biswas Jonas M. Peterson Na Liu Chuchuan Hong Teri Odom Matthew Pelton Tongcang Li Jelena Vu\v{c}kovi\'c Vladamir Shalaev Alexandra Boltasseva Sophia E. Economou Jonathan D. Hood Valentin Walther Rahul Trivedi Libai Huang
This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords many-body entanglementsolid-state quantum emitterssuperradiancephotonic graph statesdecoherencenanophotonicsquantum dotscolor centers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review makes the case that solid-state quantum emitters—color centers in diamond and silicon carbide, epitaxial quantum dots, organic molecules, and 2D semiconductors—have advanced to the point where the building blocks for many-body entanglement are no longer theoretical abstractions. The paper's central claim is that by engineering collective light–matter interactions, either through direct dipole–dipole coupling or through shared nanophotonic cavity and waveguide modes, one can generate entangled states of light and matter at scale: superradiant bursts, photonic cluster and graph states, and emergent quantum phases. It surveys the experimental milestones that support this claim, including two-emitter superradiance and subradiance, cavity-mediated coupling of silicon-vacancy centers, deterministic cluster-state generation from quantum dots, and Rydberg-exciton polariton nonlinearities. The review identifies inhomogeneous broadening and environmental decoherence as the central obstacles, and argues that tuning techniques (Stark shifts, strain, phononic bandgaps) and coherence protection are pulling these systems toward the fidelity required for fault-tolerant operation. A sympathetic reader comes away with the conclusion that scalable many-body entangled photonic states are a credible near-term target rather than a distant dream.

Core claim

The review's load-bearing assertion is that the field has reached a turning point: individual solid-state emitters can be made nearly transform-limited, and the interactions needed to entangle many of them have now been demonstrated in a diverse set of platforms. The central mechanism is photon-mediated coupling, captured by an effective master equation in which the electromagnetic Green's function dictates both coherent exchange (the real part, Jij) and collective dissipation (the imaginary part, Gammaij). Realizing the right Green's function through cavities, waveguides, or plasmonic structures converts a disordered ensemble into a correlated quantum system, producing superradiant and subr

What carries the argument

The electromagnetic Green's function G(ri, rj), which links the field at one emitter's position to the dipole of another, is the central object. Its real and imaginary parts define the coherent (Jij) and dissipative (Gammaij) couplings that appear in the many-emitter master equation. This single mechanism unifies the phenomena the review surveys: spectral splittings in two-emitter experiments are the coherent part of the interaction; modified decay rates (superradiance and subradiance) are the dissipative part; and cavity- or waveguide-mediated couplings extend these interactions over many wavelengths. Nanophotonic structures—photonic crystal cavities, ring resonators, waveguides, and plasmo

Load-bearing premise

The review's evidence base rests on interpreting spectral splittings, modified decay rates, and photon-correlation signatures (especially a dip in g(2)(0)) as proof of collective quantum behavior; if that interpretive link is weaker than assumed—as the review itself notes for the anti-dip case—several showcased demonstrations would not establish the many-body entanglement they are claimed to show.

What would settle it

Measure the second-order correlation function of the two-emitter silicon-carbide microdisk experiment while rapidly tuning the two emitters far apart in frequency; if the g(2)(0) anti-dip survives when the emitters are independent, the effect is not collective. More generally, a complete model of non-interacting emitters under the same detection and spectral-diffusion conditions that reproduces the observed coincidence dip would falsify the superradiance claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Superradiant emission from dense emitter ensembles can provide quantum-enhanced phase sensitivity (Heisenberg scaling of the quantum Fisher information) without requiring individual emitter control, making it a relatively low-barrier route to useful metrology.
  • Deterministic photonic cluster states from quantum dots are now a demonstrated resource for measurement-based quantum computing; extending the same protocol to larger spin registers with nuclear-spin memories could reach graph states of 10+ photons.
  • Cavity- and waveguide-mediated coupling allows spatially distant emitters to interact strongly, so that chip-scale architectures can implement all-to-all connected multi-qubit operations rather than requiring nanometer-scale placement.
  • Moiré exciton lattices in 2D materials provide a solid-state implementation of Bose-Hubbard physics, with strong on-site interactions and long-range dipolar couplings; the review's synthesis suggests these can serve as programmable quantum simulators.
  • The combination of Stark tuning, phononic bandgap engineering, and dynamical decoupling is steadily closing the gap between measured coherence times and what fault-tolerant protocols demand, making the scaling path concrete for several platforms.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural test of the review's thesis is to push beyond two-emitter experiments: measuring genuine multipartite entanglement witnesses in a three-emitter cavity-QED setup would directly probe whether the collective-state picture holds at N>2, a step the review notes has not yet been achieved.
  • Because the review concedes that g(2) anti-dips can be mimicked by non-interacting emitters under realistic conditions, future demonstrations should pair photon-correlation measurements with direct spectral or coherent-control evidence; this suggests a reporting standard for the field rather than a physics limitation.
  • The Green's-function formalism implies that inverse-designed nanophotonics—rather than only standard cavity geometries—could be used to engineer specific many-body Hamiltonians on demand. This extrapolates the review's toolkit to a programmability level it does not discuss explicitly.
  • One interesting consequence the review leaves implicit: if superradiant states are to be used for metrology, the optimal measurement scheme likely needs optical nonlinearities or specially tailored detection; the review flags this as an open problem, so a practical breakthrough may depend on integrating the very photon nonlinearities it separately surveys.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This review surveys the prospects for realizing many-body entangled states—superradiance, photonic graph/cluster states, and emergent quantum phases—using solid-state quantum emitters coupled to nanophotonic structures. It reviews single-emitter coherence and decoherence mechanisms, spectral tuning, collective few-emitter interactions, cavity and waveguide QED, large ensembles, moiré-exciton quantum phases, photon nonlinearities, deterministic cluster-state generation, and applications. The thesis is that emitter inhomogeneity and dephasing are the central obstacles, and that recent demonstrations place the field on a credible path to scalable many-body entanglement. The manuscript contains no new derivations; it is a literature review with an extensive reference list.

Significance. The review is timely and unusually broad, integrating results across molecules, quantum dots, color centers, and 2D materials. If the surveyed interpretations hold, it provides a useful roadmap and will serve as a reference for researchers entering the field. Strengths include its candid acknowledgment of the limits of photon-correlation signatures (citing Cygorek et al. [121]) and of the unresolved metrological value of superradiant states, as well as the inclusion of very recent 2024–2025 literature and clear schematic figures. The main weakness is an uneven level of confidence in the experimental evidence: some flagship superradiance demonstrations are described as confirmatory even though the review's own methodological caveat warns that such signatures are not unique to collective quantum behavior. This inconsistency weakens the evidentiary support for the central claim and should be repaired before publication.

major comments (2)
  1. [Entanglement verification and coherent control; Cavity QED with multiple emitters] The paragraph on photon-correlation diagnostics states that an anti-dip violating the bound g(2)(0) ≤ (N−1)/N 'provides a direct confirmation of inter-emitter correlations' and then immediately cautions, citing Cygorek et al. [121], that an anti-dip alone is not always a reliable superradiance signature. However, in 'Cavity QED with multiple emitters' the SiC microdisk result [95] is described as 'superradiant bunching in photon correlation measurements, confirming collective radiative decay' (Fig. 3c), and Fig. 2g describes the perovskite superlattice [103] as showing 'photon bunching at zero delay as a signature of superradiance.' These later statements are unqualified. Please either apply the [121] caveat to these specific experiments or provide a concrete argument explaining why the multimode or many-emitter conditions in [95,103] exclude the non-interacting alternative. This is load
  2. [Outlook/Future Perspectives] The abstract and introduction list quantum sensing among the target applications of many-body entangled states. The Outlook section, however, correctly states that 'the direct usefulness of the superradiant states to quantum sensing remains an open problem' and that optimal measurement schemes and the effects of loss/dephasing are not understood. This is an honest hedge, but it is not reflected in the forward-looking claims near the beginning. The authors should either temper the abstract/introduction or add a sentence in the introduction flagging that the metrological advantage is currently conjectural, so that the review is internally consistent.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Outlook/Future Perspectives] Typo: 'the direct usefulness of of the superradiant states' should read 'the direct usefulness of the superradiant states'.
  2. [Outlook/Future Perspectives] Typo: 'In TMDs and and their heterostructures' should read 'In TMDs and their heterostructures'.
  3. [Author list] The author name 'Vladamir Shalaev' appears to be a misspelling of 'Vladimir Shalaev'.
  4. [Entanglement verification and coherent control] The term 'anti-dip' is potentially confusing. In photon-correlation measurements, an anti-bunching dip is a suppression at zero delay, while superradiance is often discussed in terms of bunching (g(2)(0)>1). Please define the term and use consistent terminology with the later 'bunching' descriptions.
  5. [Cavity QED with multiple emitters] The notation for silicon-vacancy centers is inconsistent: 'Vsi' appears in several places, whereas the standard notation used elsewhere in the text is 'VSi'.
  6. [Figure 4] The caption refers to 'Figure 4i-h'; the intended reference appears to be panels (i) and (j). Please correct.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: this is a literature review with no fitted parameters, predictions, or uniqueness claims that reduce to their inputs.

full rationale

This paper is an expository review, not a derivation. It surveys demonstrated superradiance/subradiance, cavity-mediated interactions, photon nonlinearities, and graph-state generation in solid-state emitters, citing primary experimental and theoretical works from many independent groups. No parameter is fitted to data and later called a prediction; no quantity is defined in terms of itself; no uniqueness theorem is invoked to force a choice of model. The authors do cite their own prior work (e.g., [87] superradiant organic molecules, [181] molecular cavity QED, [225] Rydberg-exciton nonlinearities, [94] theory of quantum-enhanced interferometry), but these self-citations are used as part of the surveyed evidence base, alongside independent studies, and none of the review's organizational claims reduces to them. The one relevant internal tension is the anti-dip caveat: the review states, citing Cygorek et al. [121], that 'the observation of an anti-dip alone does not always constitute a reliable signature of superradiant behavior,' while elsewhere describing systems such as [95] as 'confirming collective radiative decay' and [103] as showing superradiance. This is a limitation on the strength of the experimental evidence, and the review partially hedges by noting that 'two-photon correlation measurements still signal non-classical light.' It is a correctness/evidence concern, not circular reasoning: the review does not define superradiance in terms of an anti-dip, nor does it derive any result from that signature. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The review introduces no free parameters and no invented entities. Its organizational claims rest on standard quantum-optics frameworks (Markovian master equation, Dicke/Tavis-Cummings collective models, stabilizer-based verification) and on an interpretive assumption about experimental signatures that the review itself acknowledges as imperfect.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption The Markovian master equation with Green's-function-mediated coherent and dissipative couplings (Eq. 1, Box 2) adequately describes many-emitter light-matter dynamics.
    The review's entire framework for emitter-emitter interactions (J_ij and Gamma_ij from the electromagnetic Green's function) is the standard Lehmberg master equation, valid in the Born-Markov regime; non-Markovian effects are not treated and are not discussed as a limitation.
  • domain assumption Dicke/Tavis-Cummings collective models apply to dense solid-state emitter ensembles, including predicted N^2 superradiant scaling.
    The superradiance discussion (Section “Collective phenomena in large ensembles”) rests on Dicke's model and its 2D/waveguide extensions, which assume near-identical emitters; inhomogeneous broadening is acknowledged as the main obstacle, so this assumption is load-bearing for the review's optimism.
  • domain assumption Observed photon-correlation signatures, spectral splittings, and time-resolved decay changes are valid evidence of collective quantum states in the surveyed experiments.
    The review itself flags (entanglement-verification section, ref [121]) that a g(2) anti-dip can arise from non-interacting emitters, making this interpretive link load-bearing for its survey of experimental demonstrations.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 38022 in / 10554 out tokens · 110400 ms · 2026-08-03T20:07:56.863400+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The preparation and control of quantum states lie at the heart of quantum information science (QIS). Recent advances in solid-state quantum emitters (QEs) and nanophotonics have transformed the landscape of quantum photonic technologies, enabling scalable generation of quantum states of light and matter. A new frontier in solid-state quantum photonics is the engineering of many-body interactions between QEs and photons to achieve robust coherence and controllable many-body entanglement. These entangled states, including photonic graph and cluster states, superradiant emission, and emergent quantum phases, are promising for quantum computation, sensing, and simulation. However, intrinsic inhomogeneities and decoherence in solid-state platforms pose significant challenges to realize such complex entangled states. This review provides an overview of the fundamental many-body interactions and dynamics at the light-matter interfaces of solid-state QEs, and discusses recent advances in mitigating decoherence and harnessing robust many-body coherence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.20797 by Alexander Senichev, Alexandra Boltasseva, Arshag Danageozian, Bennet Windt, Chanchal, Christian M. Lange, Chuchuan Hong, Emma Daggett, Jelena Vu\v{c}kovi\'c, Jonas M. Peterson, Jonathan D. Hood, Jordi Arnau Monta\~n\`a-L\'opez, Kinjol Barua, Libai Huang, Matthew Pelton, Na Liu, Rahul Trivedi, Sophia E. Economou, Souvik Biswas, Teri Odom, Tongcang Li, Valentin Walther, Vijin Kizhake Veetil, Vladamir Shalaev, Xingyu Gao, Zhaoyun Zheng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of achieving many-body entanglement with solid-state quantum emitters integrated in nanophotonics. Top: Representative platforms, including vacancies in wide-bandgap crystals, epitaxial quantum dots, molecules, hBN defects, 2D excitons, and Rydberg excitons, highlighting complementary strengths in coherence, scalability, and intrinsic nonlinearity. Quantum dot image reproduced with permis￾sion fro… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Many-body entanglement and collective emission in solid state QE systems. (a) Spectra of the superradiant (|+⟩) and subradiant (|−⟩) single-excitation states of two sub-wavelength spaced organic molecules, showing an extinguishing of the subradiant linewidth as the molecules are tuned into resonance. (b) Fluorescence spectrum of the system in a), displaying an additional two-photon peak at sufficiently lar… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Collective interactions of multiple solid-state quantum emitters in nanophotonic environments ob￾served across molecular, quantum-dot, and color-center platforms. (a) Schematic cavity transmission spectra and energy-level diagrams illustrating three regimes: (i) two emitters off resonance with each other but near￾resonant with the cavity, decaying independently, (ii) emitters resonant with each other and w… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Pathways to achieve strong photon nonlinearity through exciton polaritons. (a) Excitation and re-emission of an exciton polariton by a single photon. Interactions shift the mode off resonance, suppressing multi-photon transmission (polariton blockade), reproduced with permission from Ref. [211] (b) Detun￾ing dependent coincidence counts and the corresponding nonclassical correlations from polaritons based … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: State of the art generation of Graph States and applications of many-body entangled states. (a-h) Generation of cluster and graph states from QDs. (a) Negatively charged QD in the center of a connected pillar optical cavity, (b) single InGaAs QD with GaAs barriers, (c) QD spectral emission, (d) Energy levels and optical selection rules of the negatively charged QD in the presence of a small (<100 mT) trans… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

298 extracted references · 114 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Kimble, H. J. The quantum internet.Nature453, 1023–1030, DOI: 10.1038/nature07127 (2008)

    doi:10.1038/nature07127 2008

  2. [2]

    Scaling up solid-state quantum photonics.Science362, 646–647, DOI: 10.1126/science

    Lodahl, P. Scaling up solid-state quantum photonics.Science362, 646–647, DOI: 10.1126/science. aav3076 (2018)

    doi:10.1126/science 2018

  3. [3]

    Turunen, M.et al.Quantum photonics with layered 2d materials.Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 219–236, DOI: 10.1038/s42254-021-00408-0 (2022)

    doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00408-0 2022

  4. [4]

    J.et al.Quantum-coherent nanoscience.Nat

    Heinrich, A. J.et al.Quantum-coherent nanoscience.Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 1318–1329, DOI: 10.1038/ s41565-021-00994-1 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    E.et al.Photon-mediated interactions between quantum emitters in a diamond nanocavity

    Evans, R. E.et al.Photon-mediated interactions between quantum emitters in a diamond nanocavity. Science362, 662–665, DOI: 10.1126/science.aau4691 (2018)

    doi:10.1126/science.aau4691 2018

  6. [6]

    Dousse, A.et al.Ultrabright source of entangled photon pairs.Nature466, 217–220, DOI: 10.1038/ nature09148 (2010)

    2010

  7. [7]

    & Gershoni, D

    Cogan, D., Su, Z.-E., Kenneth, O. & Gershoni, D. Deterministic generation of indistinguishable photons in a cluster state.Nat. Photon.17, 324–329, DOI: 10.1038/s41566-022-01152-2 (2023)

    doi:10.1038/s41566-022-01152-2 2023

  8. [8]

    Coste, N.et al.High-rate entanglement between a semiconductor spin and indistinguishable photons. Nat. Photon.17, 582–587, DOI: 10.1038/s41566-023-01186-0 (2023)

    doi:10.1038/s41566-023-01186-0 2023

  9. [9]

    Q.et al.Scalable in operando strain tuning in nanophotonic waveguides enabling three- quantum-dot superradiance.Nat

    Grim, J. Q.et al.Scalable in operando strain tuning in nanophotonic waveguides enabling three- quantum-dot superradiance.Nat. Mater.18, 963–969, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-019-0418-0 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41563-019-0418-0 2019

  10. [10]

    N., Lee, S.-Y

    Atatüre, M., Englund, D., Vamivakas, A. N., Lee, S.-Y. & Wrachtrup, J. Material platforms for spin- based photonic quantum technologies.Nat. Rev. Mater.3, 38–51, DOI: 10.1038/s41578-018-0008-9 (2018)

    doi:10.1038/s41578-018-0008-9 2018

  11. [11]

    & White, A

    Senellart, P., Solomon, G. & White, A. High-performance semiconductor quantum-dot single-photon sources.Nat. Nanotechnol.12, 1026–1039, DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2017.218 (2017)

    doi:10.1038/nnano.2017.218 2017

  12. [12]

    D., Hanson, R., Wrachtrup, J

    Awschalom, D. D., Hanson, R., Wrachtrup, J. & Zhou, B. B. Quantum technologies with optically interfaced solid-state spins.Nat. Photon.12, 516–527, DOI: 10.1038/s41566-018-0232-2 (2018)

    doi:10.1038/s41566-018-0232-2 2018

  13. [13]

    L., Furusawa, A

    O’Brien, J. L., Furusawa, A. & Vučković, J. Photonic quantum technologies.Nat. Photon.3, 687–695, DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2009.229 (2009)

    doi:10.1038/nphoton.2009.229 2009

  14. [14]

    Nanotechnol.10, 497–502, DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.75 (2015)

    He, Y.-M.et al.Single quantum emitters in monolayer semiconductors.Nat. Nanotechnol.10, 497–502, DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.75 (2015). 22

    work page doi:10.1038/nnano.2015.75 2015

  15. [15]

    Nanotechnol.16, 399–403, DOI: 10.1038/s41565-020-00831-x (2021)

    Tomm, N.et al.A bright and fast source of coherent single photons.Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 399–403, DOI: 10.1038/s41565-020-00831-x (2021)

    doi:10.1038/s41565-020-00831-x 2021

  16. [16]

    Mater.20, 1615–1628, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-021-00987-4 (2021)

    Toninelli, C.et al.Single organic molecules for photonic quantum technologies.Nat. Mater.20, 1615–1628, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-021-00987-4 (2021)

    doi:10.1038/s41563-021-00987-4 2021

  17. [17]

    & Toth, M

    Aharonovich, I., Tetienne, J.-P. & Toth, M. Quantum emitters in hexagonal boron nitride.Nano Lett. 22, 9227–9235, DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c03743 (2022)

    doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c03743 2022

  18. [18]

    Commun.11, 4745, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-18594-1 (2020)

    Zhai, L.et al.Low-noise gaas quantum dots for quantum photonics.Nat. Commun.11, 4745, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-18594-1 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18594-1 2020

  19. [19]

    & Sanguinetti, S

    Gurioli, M., Wang, Z., Rastelli, A., Kuroda, T. & Sanguinetti, S. Droplet epitaxy of semicon- ductor nanostructures for quantum photonic devices.Nat. Mater.18, 799–810, DOI: 10.1038/ s41563-019-0355-y (2019). Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2019

  20. [20]

    & Lodahl, P

    Uppu, R., Midolo, L., Zhou, X., Carolan, J. & Lodahl, P. Quantum-dot-based deterministic pho- ton–emitter interfaces for scalable photonic quantum technology.Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 1308–1317, DOI: 10.1038/s41565-021-00965-6 (2021)

    doi:10.1038/s41565-021-00965-6 2021

  21. [21]

    Gao, X.et al.Single nuclear spin detection and control in a van der Waals material.Nature643, 943–949, DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09258-7 (2025)

    doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09258-7 2025

  22. [22]

    Mater.22, 1311–1316, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-023-01645-7 (2023)

    Li, X.et al.Proximity-induced chiral quantum light generation in strain-engineered WSe2/NiPS3 heterostructures.Nat. Mater.22, 1311–1316, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-023-01645-7 (2023). Number: 11 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    work page doi:10.1038/s41563-023-01645-7 2023

  23. [23]

    O., Peana, S., Sychev, D., Xu, X., Lagutchev, A

    Senichev, A., Martin, Z. O., Peana, S., Sychev, D., Xu, X., Lagutchev, A. S., Boltasseva, A., Shalaev, V. M. Room-temperature single-photon emitters in silicon nitride.Sci. Adv.7, eabj0627, DOI: 10. 1126/sciadv.abj0627 2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    González-Tudela, A., Reiserer, A., García-Ripoll, J. J. & García-Vidal, F. J. Light–matter interactions in quantum nanophotonic devices.Nat. Rev. Phys.6, 166–179, DOI: 10.1038/s42254-023-00681-1 (2024)

    doi:10.1038/s42254-023-00681-1 2024

  25. [25]

    Photon.12, 659–670, DOI: 10.1038/ s41566-018-0246-9 (2018)

    Molesky, S.et al.Inverse design in nanophotonics.Nat. Photon.12, 659–670, DOI: 10.1038/ s41566-018-0246-9 (2018)

    2018

  26. [26]

    & Reitzenstein, S

    Rodt, S. & Reitzenstein, S. Integrated nanophotonics for the development of fully functional quantum circuitsbasedonon-demandsingle-photonemitters.APL Photonics6, DOI:10.1063/5.0031628(2021)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0031628(2021 2021

  27. [27]

    M., Guidry, M

    Lukin, D. M., Guidry, M. A. & Vučković, J. Integrated quantum photonics with silicon carbide: Challenges and prospects.PRX Quantum1, 020102, DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.1.020102 (2020)

    doi:10.1103/prxquantum.1.020102 2020

  28. [28]

    & Thompson, M

    Wang, J., Sciarrino, F., Laing, A. & Thompson, M. G. Integrated photonic quantum technologies.Nat. Photon.14, 273–284, DOI: 10.1038/s41566-019-0532-1 (2020). Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    doi:10.1038/s41566-019-0532-1 2020

  29. [29]

    Pelucchi, E.et al.The potential and global outlook of integrated photonics for quantum technologies. Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 194–208, DOI: 10.1038/s42254-021-00398-z (2022). Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    doi:10.1038/s42254-021-00398-z 2022

  30. [30]

    O., Wang, Y., Matthiessen, O

    Senichev, A., Martin, Z. O., Wang, Y., Matthiessen, O. M., Lagutchev, A., Htoon, H., Boltasseva, A., Shalaev, V. M. Quantum emitters in aluminum nitride induced by heavy ion irradiation.APL Quantum1, 036103, DOI: 10.1063/5.0199647 2024)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0199647 2024

  31. [31]

    & Toth, M

    Aharonovich, I., Englund, D. & Toth, M. Solid-state single-photon emitters.Nat. Photon.10, 631–641, DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2016.186 (2016)

    doi:10.1038/nphoton.2016.186 2016

  32. [32]

    Fox, A. M. Solid-state quantum emitters.Advanced Quantum Technologies8, 2300390, DOI: 10.1002/ qute.202300390 (2025). 23

    2025

  33. [33]

    Low-dimensional solid-state single-photon emitters.Nanophotonics14, 1687–1713, DOI: 10.1515/nanoph-2024-0569 2025

    Chen, J., Cui, C., Lawrie, B., Xue, Y., Guha, S., Eichenfield, M., Zhao, H., Yan, X. Low-dimensional solid-state single-photon emitters.Nanophotonics14, 1687–1713, DOI: 10.1515/nanoph-2024-0569 2025

    work page doi:10.1515/nanoph-2024-0569 2024

  34. [34]

    A.et al.Shallow silicon vacancy centers with lifetime-limited optical linewidths in diamond nanostructures.Nano Lett.23, 10901–10907, DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c03145 (2023)

    Zuber, J. A.et al.Shallow silicon vacancy centers with lifetime-limited optical linewidths in diamond nanostructures.Nano Lett.23, 10901–10907, DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c03145 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c03145 2023

  35. [35]

    Sipahigil, A.et al.Indistinguishable photons from separated silicon-vacancy centers in diamond.Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 113602, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.113602 (2014)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.113602 2014

  36. [36]

    T.et al.Near transform-limited quantum dot linewidths in a broadband photonic crystal waveguide.ACS Photonics7, 2343–2349, DOI: 10.1021/acsphotonics.0c00758 (2020)

    Pedersen, F. T.et al.Near transform-limited quantum dot linewidths in a broadband photonic crystal waveguide.ACS Photonics7, 2343–2349, DOI: 10.1021/acsphotonics.0c00758 (2020)

    doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.0c00758 2020

  37. [37]

    Thyrrestrup, H.et al.Quantumopticswithnear-lifetime-limitedquantum-dottransitionsinananopho- tonic waveguide.Nano Lett.18, 1801–1806, DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b05016 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b05016 2018

  38. [38]

    Santori, C., Fattal, D., Vučković, J., Solomon, G. S. & Yamamoto, Y. Indistinguishable photons from a single-photon device.nature419, 594–597, DOI: 10.1038/nature01086 (2002)

    doi:10.1038/nature01086 2002

  39. [39]

    Lombardi, P.et al.Triggered emission of indistinguishable photons from an organic dye molecule. Appl. Phys. Lett.118, DOI: doi.org/10.1063/5.0048567 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0048567 2021

  40. [40]

    V.et al.Transform-limited single photons from a single quantum dot.Nat

    Kuhlmann, A. V.et al.Transform-limited single photons from a single quantum dot.Nat. Commun. 6, 8204, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9204 (2015)

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms9204 2015

  41. [41]

    V.et al.Charge noise and spin noise in a semiconductor quantum device.Nat

    Kuhlmann, A. V.et al.Charge noise and spin noise in a semiconductor quantum device.Nat. Phys. 9, 570–575, DOI: 10.1038/nphys2688 (2013)

    doi:10.1038/nphys2688 2013

  42. [42]

    Çakan, A.et al.Quantum optics applications of hexagonal boron nitride defects.Adv. Opt. Mater. 13, 2402508, DOI: 10.1002/adom.202402508 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1002/adom.202402508 2025

  43. [43]

    & Aharonovich, I

    Toth, M. & Aharonovich, I. Single photon sources in atomically thin materials.Annual Review of Physical Chemistry70, 123–142, DOI: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-042018-052628 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-physchem-042018-052628 2019

  44. [44]

    & Heindel, T

    Gao, T., von Helversen, M., Antón-Solanas, C., Schneider, C. & Heindel, T. Atomically-thin single-photon sources for quantum communication.npj 2D Mater. Appl.7, 4, DOI: 10.1038/ s41699-023-00366-4 (2023)

    2023

  45. [45]

    G.et al.Nanophotonics with multilayer van der Waals materials.Nat

    Zotev, P. G.et al.Nanophotonics with multilayer van der Waals materials.Nat. Photon.1–15, DOI: 10.1038/s41566-025-01717-x (2025)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41566-025-01717-x 2025

  46. [46]

    Esmann, M., Wein, S. C. & Antón-Solanas, C. Solid-state single-photon sources: Recent advances for novel quantum materials.Adv. Funct. Mater.34, 2315936, DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202315936 (2024)

    doi:10.1002/adfm.202315936 2024

  47. [47]

    A., Sato, S.-i

    Castelletto, S., Inam, F. A., Sato, S.-i. & Boretti, A. Hexagonal boron nitride: a review of the emerging material platform for single-photon sources and the spin–photon interface.Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 11, 740–769, DOI: 10.3762/bjnano.11.61 (2020)

    work page doi:10.3762/bjnano.11.61 2020

  48. [48]

    Shaik, A. B. & Palla, P. Optical quantum technologies with hexagonal boron nitride single photon sources.Scientific reports11, 12285, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90804-4 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-021-90804-4 2021

  49. [49]

    Dietrich, A.et al.Observation of fourier transform limited lines in hexagonal boron nitride.Phys. Rev. B98, 081414, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.98.081414 (2018)

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.98.081414 2018

  50. [50]

    & Aharonovich, I

    Kianinia, M., Xu, Z.-Q., Toth, M. & Aharonovich, I. Quantum emitters in 2d materials: Emitter engineering, photophysics, and integration in photonic nanostructures.Appl. Phys. Rev.9, DOI: 10.1063/5.0072091 (2022)

    doi:10.1063/5.0072091 2022

  51. [51]

    Fournier, C.et al.Two-photon interference from a quantum emitter in hexagonal boron nitride.Phys. Rev. Appl.19, L041003, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.19.L041003 (2023). 24

    doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.l041003 2023

  52. [52]

    Akbari, H.et al.Lifetime-limited and tunable quantum light emission in h-BN via electric field modulation.Nano Lett.22, 7798–7803, DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c02163 (2022)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c02163 2022

  53. [53]

    Ding, X.et al.On-demand single photons with high extraction efficiency and near-unity indistin- guishability from a resonantly driven quantum dot in a micropillar.Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 020401, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.020401 (2016)

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.020401 2016

  54. [54]

    Photon.10, 340–345, DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2016.23 (2016)

    Somaschi, N.et al.Near-optimal single-photon sources in the solid state.Nat. Photon.10, 340–345, DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2016.23 (2016)

    doi:10.1038/nphoton.2016.23 2016

  55. [55]

    M., Jarmola, A., Budker, D

    Bar-Gill, N., Pham, L. M., Jarmola, A., Budker, D. & Walsworth, R. L. Solid-state electronic spin coherence time approaching one second.Nat. Commun.4, 1743, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2771 (2013)

    doi:10.1038/ncomms2771 2013

  56. [56]

    Hepp, C.et al.Electronic structure of the silicon vacancy color center in diamond.Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 036405, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.036405 (2014)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.036405 2014

  57. [57]

    Commun.8, 15579, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15579 (2017)

    Pingault, B.et al.Coherent control of the silicon-vacancy spin in diamond.Nat. Commun.8, 15579, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15579 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms15579 2017

  58. [58]

    J.et al.All-optical initialization, readout, and coherent preparation of single silicon-vacancy spins in diamond.Phys

    Rogers, L. J.et al.All-optical initialization, readout, and coherent preparation of single silicon-vacancy spins in diamond.Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 263602, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.263602 (2014)

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.263602 2014

  59. [59]

    Vaidya, S., Gao, X., Dikshit, S., Aharonovich, I. & Li, T. Quantum sensing and imaging with spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride.Advances in Physics: X8, 2206049, DOI: 10.1080/23746149.2023. 2206049(2023). Publisher: Taylor&Francis_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2023.2206049

    arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    Commun.14, 3299, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39115-y (2023)

    Gong, R.et al.Coherent dynamics of strongly interacting electronic spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride.Nat. Commun.14, 3299, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39115-y (2023). Publisher: Nature Pub- lishing Group

    doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39115-y 2023

  61. [61]

    B., Sychev, D., Gao, X., Peana, S., Baburin, A

    Xu, X., Solanki, A. B., Sychev, D., Gao, X., Peana, S., Baburin, A. S., Pagadala, K., Martin, Z. O., Chowdhury, S. N., Chen, Y. P., Taniguchi, T., Watanabe, K., Rodionov, I. A., Kildishev, A. V., Li, T., Upadhyaya, P., Boltasseva, A., Shalaev, V. M. Greatly enhanced emission from spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride enabled by a low-loss plasmonic nano...

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c03100 2023

  62. [62]

    Commun.13, 4347, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-31743-0 (2022)

    Haykal, A.et al.Decoherence ofV − B spin defects in monoisotopic hexagonal boron nitride.Nat. Commun.13, 4347, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-31743-0 (2022)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31743-0 2022

  63. [63]

    Commun.14, 5089, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-40473-w (2023)

    Rizzato, R.et al.Extending the coherence of spin defects in hbn enables advanced qubit control and quantum sensing.Nat. Commun.14, 5089, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-40473-w (2023)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-40473-w 2023

  64. [64]

    Cywiński, Ł., Witzel, W. M. & Das Sarma, S. Pure quantum dephasing of a solid-state electron spin qubit in a large nuclear spin bath coupled by long-range hyperfine-mediated interactions.Phys. Rev. B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics79, 245314, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.245314 (2009)

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.79.245314 2009

  65. [65]

    & Chekhovich, E

    Gillard, G., Clarke, E. & Chekhovich, E. A. Harnessing many-body spin environment for long coherence storage and high-fidelity single-shot qubit readout.Nat. Commun.13, 4048, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-31618-4 (2022)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-022-31618-4 2022

  66. [66]

    N.et al.Enhanced electron-spin coherence in a gaas quantum emitter.Phys

    Nguyen, G. N.et al.Enhanced electron-spin coherence in a gaas quantum emitter.Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 210805, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.210805 (2023)

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.210805 2023

  67. [67]

    & Gregersen, N

    Vannucci, L. & Gregersen, N. Highly efficient and indistinguishable single-photon sources via phonon- decoupledtwo-colorexcitation.Phys. Rev. B107, 195306, DOI:10.1103/PhysRevB.107.195306(2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.107.195306(2023 2023

  68. [68]

    Phys.21, 77–82, DOI: 10.1038/s41567-024-02697-5 (2025)

    Kuruma, K.et al.Controlling interactions between high-frequency phonons and single quantum sys- tems using phononic crystals.Nat. Phys.21, 77–82, DOI: 10.1038/s41567-024-02697-5 (2025). 25

    doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02697-5 2025

  69. [69]

    S.et al.Nano-acoustic resonator with ultralong phonon lifetime.Science370, 840–843, DOI: 10.1126/science.abc7312 (2020)

    MacCabe, G. S.et al.Nano-acoustic resonator with ultralong phonon lifetime.Science370, 840–843, DOI: 10.1126/science.abc7312 (2020). https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abc7312

    work page doi:10.1126/science.abc7312 2020

  70. [70]

    Meesala, S.et al.Strain engineering of the silicon-vacancy center in diamond.Phys. Rev. B97, 205444, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.97.205444 (2018)

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.97.205444 2018

  71. [71]

    J.et al.Coherence protection of spin qubits in hexagonal boron nitride.Nat

    Ramsay, A. J.et al.Coherence protection of spin qubits in hexagonal boron nitride.Nat. Commun. 14, 461, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-36196-7 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36196-7 2023

  72. [72]

    Sohn, Y.-I.et al.Controlling the coherence of a diamond spin qubit through its strain environment. Nat. Commun.9, 2012, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04340-3 (2018)

    doi:10.1038/s41467-018-04340-3 2012

  73. [73]

    I.et al.Single-shot readout and weak measurement of a tin-vacancy qubit in diamond

    Rosenthal, E. I.et al.Single-shot readout and weak measurement of a tin-vacancy qubit in diamond. Phys. Rev. X14, 041008, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.14.041008 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.14.041008 2024

  74. [74]

    J.et al.Quantum-confined stark shifts of charged exciton complexes in quantum dots.Phys

    Finley, J. J.et al.Quantum-confined stark shifts of charged exciton complexes in quantum dots.Phys. Rev. B70, 201308, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.70.201308 (2004)

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.70.201308 2004

  75. [75]

    D.et al.Manipulating exciton fine structure in quantum dots with a lateral electric field.Appl

    Gerardot, B. D.et al.Manipulating exciton fine structure in quantum dots with a lateral electric field.Appl. Phys. Lett.90, 041101, DOI: 10.1063/1.2431758 (2007). https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/ article-pdf/doi/10.1063/1.2431758/14367861/041101_1_online.pdf

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2431758 2007

  76. [76]

    https://pubs.aip.org/aip/ adv/article-pdf/doi/10.1063/1.5110865/12907337/085112_1_online.pdf

    Höfer, B.et al.Tuning emission energy and fine structure splitting in quantum dots emitting in the telecom o-band.AIP Advances9, 085112, DOI: 10.1063/1.5110865 (2019). https://pubs.aip.org/aip/ adv/article-pdf/doi/10.1063/1.5110865/12907337/085112_1_online.pdf

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5110865 2019

  77. [77]

    & Bester, G

    Luo, J.-W., Singh, R., Zunger, A. & Bester, G. Influence of the atomic-scale structure on the exciton fine-structure splitting in ingaas and gaas quantum dots in a vertical electric field.Phys. Rev. B86, 161302, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.86.161302 (2012)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.86.161302 2012

  78. [78]

    Colautti, M.et al.Laser-induced frequency tuning of fourier-limited single-molecule emitters.ACS Nano14, 13584–13592, DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.0c05620 (2020)

    doi:10.1021/acsnano.0c05620 2020

  79. [79]

    ACS Nano18, 32508–32516, DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.4c08382 (2024)

    Duquennoy, R.et al.Enhanced control of single-molecule emission frequency and spectral diffusion. ACS Nano18, 32508–32516, DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.4c08382 (2024). PMID: 39537346, https://doi. org/10.1021/acsnano.4c08382

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c08382 2024

  80. [80]

    D., Pan, A., Nichol, J

    Burkard, G., Ladd, T. D., Pan, A., Nichol, J. M. & Petta, J. R. Semiconductor spin qubits.Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 025003, DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.95.025003 (2023)

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.95.025003 2023

Showing first 80 references.